Posts about Church Parking
Parking
Diagonal parking: Does this quick fix get us what we want?
Last week, Councilmember Harry Thomas, Jr. introduced two bills to encourage diagonal (angled) parking. They sound like they'll increase the amount of parking. But is that what we want?
Photo by Diana Marsh on Flickr.
Both bills would require DDOT to establish procedures for adding diagonal parking. One would let businesses on a street apply for diagonal parking if 60% agree. The other would let religious institutions apply for diagonal parking, but only on Sundays, and with approval from the area ANC.
Diagonal parking means more parking spaces, which most business owners think will increase customers. But how do people get there? Who comes there? And why are Thomas' bills relevant?
DDOT already puts in angled parking in DC, but without a formal process. Requests usually come from Business Improvement Districts (BIDs), churches, ANCs, councilmembers, the Mayor's office, or citizens. The requests go to DDOT's Ward Planner, the Parking Specialist, or the Curbside Specialist. Several divisions discuss the idea based on the need, construction or other plans already in place, and, of course, traffic counts.
For businesses without a BID, this bills to establish a formal process could be helpful. For areas where double parking for churches often happens anyway, this might be a way to make some peace between neighbors and churches. If these requests are common, DDOT should have a formal policy.
When DDOT turns down requests, people usually aren't satisfied. They go higher, to the Council or the Mayor, and the order comes down to put it in. Given that, why would DDOT ever say no to diagonal parking? Is DDOT anti-business? Is DDOT anti-church? Here are a couple of reasons.
- The street's not wide enough. Parallel parking requires 7-9 feet, travel lanes are 10-12, and bike lanes are 5. Angled parking, depending on whether the angle is 45, 60, or 90, consumes 16-20 feet. Unless there's an travel lane that isn't needed, angled parking isn't possible.
- The space is already being used. What's occupying the space today? If vehicle counts are high enough, then the answer is traffic. If not, there might be a bike lane or a sidewalk widening planned. To install permanent diagonal parking, the city needs to decide if enough space can be taken out of the transportation network permanently during the week. This is not an easy decision. Once angled parking is installed, an act of Congress seems to be the only way to undo it.
On Sundays, traffic is likely not an issue. While at DDOT, planners recognized that permanent diagonal parking often kills the possibility for bike lanes on certain blocks (11th ST NW between Vermont and Q Streets, for example). Does it matter if the bike lanes are blocked on Sundays, since there's so little traffic anyway? Can people on bikes simply use the travel lane? This might not be problematic on Sundays, but could be slippery slope to losing the integrity of bike lanes.
Now the broader question: Do we want more parking? It has generally been treated as good. But what else comes with more parking?
More traffic. It's a fact (proven over and over and over) that more parking creates more traffic. But in a retail area that seems barren, isn't more traffic a good thing? Maybe, but so is a good streetscape to make people want to shop there in the first place.
Diagonal parking has a traffic calming effect, but so to other techniques. After the protected bike lanes on 15th Street NW were installed, the number of vehicles driving over 20 mph over the speed limit decreased from 147 a day to 3 (a 98% reduction). Calmer traffic means people are driving slower, looking around more at businesses, and watching for cars exiting spaces. But it's just one tool in the traffic calming toolbox.
Diagonal parking is just one way to address parking shortages. There are many ways to manage parking, from building a garage to alternating pricing and time limits at meters. A bill that calls out a single solution to an often complicated problem ties the hands of experts whose job it is to keep up with innovations and to understand limits of each one.
More parking means businesses tend to market to people driving in, not neighbors. When residents can walk, bike, take the bus or a taxi to businesses nearby, businesses will cater to them. But when people can drive to your neighborhood restaurant, the restaurant will start giving them what they want, not what you want.
That means more emphasis on parking and valets, and less on sidewalks, trees, benches, bike racks, and bike lanes. While more parking for businesses and churches seems like a good way to deal with struggling businesses and too many people driving in on Sundays, it enforces the idea that these aren't really for neighbors.
More parking hurts the taxicab industry. Taxis are demand-responsive, on-demand transit. But the taxi system works best without congestion and when people aren't driving themselves. Taxis are also a great way to get home from bars at 2am, when Metro is infrequent and people do not want to be driving.
Are Councilmember Thomas' bills necessary? Do we need more permanent parking? If the honest intent of these bills is to issue procedures, and not simply to force DDOT to approve more diagonal parking, then they could have some benefit, but may not be necessary. But let us not forget that more parking often comes at the price of other aspects of city life we enjoy.
Government
DC Council considers primary date, diagonal parking, free school transit, taxi medallions and much more
DC's primary will likely move to April, people will get solar rebates, and bills introduced in the DC Council yesterday could establish a taxi medallion system, make transit free for schoolchildren, add diagonal parking, and put requirements on large retailers like Walmart.
Photo by Pcora on Flickr.
The Council approved the first reading of a bill to move DC's presidential and local primary to April 3 next year. The presidential date allows DC to potentially band together with Maryland and Delaware and get bonus delegates from the political parties, which are trying to incentivize regional primaries after March.
For the local primary, March is more problematic. Since DC's primary essentially determines the winner in races including the mayoral race, a primary at the start of March could mean that one person will hold the seat for 10 more months while another is already virtually certain to take over.
We saw Mayor Fenty essentially stop making significant decisions once he lost the primary, but Gray was not yet mayor to start making any decisions, and so little happened in the government in the interim. Having this last for almost a year is dangerous. Councilmembers Phil Mendelson (at-large) and Tommy Wells (ward 6) raised this same objection in the session, but won over no colleagues.
Also during the legislative session, the Council gave those solar rebates to people who had qualified but suddenly found there was no money; unfortunately, this comes out of other sustainable energy funding.
They also delayed a vote on a nominee to the Board of Zoning Adjustment, Gray campaign attorney 1998-2000 DCRA head Lloyd Jordan, in part because of opposition letters from some neighborhood groups.
Sekou Biddle (interim at-large) introduced a bill to make transit free for children traveling to and from school. He argued that this will reduce truancy. It might, but it would also cost money which DC doesn't have, and there was no indication where the money might come from to pay for this.
Harry Thomas, Jr. (ward 5) introduced three car-related bills. A pair of bills asks for regulations to allow diagonal parking in business corridors, when 60% of businesses in an area ask for it, and religious institutions on Sundays, with the approval of the area ANC.
Diagonal parking can be a fine way to fit more parking into an area when there is room on the street that's not already being used. DDOT is proposing this between Tenleytown's Whole Foods and Wilson High, for instance. But in most places in DC where church parking is scarce, there isn't room on the street to add diagonal parking.
Area business corridors, ANCs, and churches should be able to petition DDOT now to consider diagonal parking if they want to. They should also be able to ask DDOT to consider removing parking, or changing a street from one-way to two-way or vice versa, or adding a bike lane.
So yes, diagonal parking should be a part of the overall toolbox, and if DDOT lacks the authority to implement it now, they should get that authority. But diagonal parking will only make sense in a very small number of cases. Thomas talked about holding town halls around his ward, and it's hard not to wonder if he's just introducing this to be able to say he's doing something at those town halls, even if that something is almost always impractical for the specific situation.
On a side note, Thomas seems to be trying to keep the bill from singling out one faith by referring to "religious institutions," but by limiting the rule to Sundays, it does exclude religious institutions which celebrate on Saturdays, for instance.
Another bill that's likely to generate more serious debate is a measure from Thomas, Michael Brown (at-large) and Marion Barry (ward 8) to establish a system of taxicab medallions, with separate categories for DC resident drivers and non-resident drivers, as well as special categories for taxis operating in underserved areas and low-emission (hybrid) taxis. This topic is worth its own, separate post.
Phil Mendelson introduced a pair of bills largely targeted at Wal-Mart. Both apply only to retailers of at least 75,000 square feet, requiring them to negotiate Community Benefits Agreements with their neighborhoods and pay living wages and benefits.
Observers think these have little chance of passing. The bills will go to committees chaired by Thomas and Michael Brown, who both court the union vote but also who have shown little interest in interfering with Walmart's expansion into DC.
Other bills included ones to require food trucks to pay sales tax, as we discussed yesterday, and expand low-income property tax relief, from Jack Evans (ward 2); to publish Council procurement information online, from Chairman Kwame Brown and Mary Cheh (ward 3); to allow L3Cs, a type of hybrid nonprofit/for-profit business entity; and a number of measures from Cheh to improve transparency.
Politics
Mark Long: changing the culture how?
When I set out to interview At-Large candidates, I was most hopeful about Mark Long. At least at the start of the campaign, his platform spoke of "getting people out of cars" (though I can't find that on his site any more). Maybe Mark Long would be the Smart Growth candidate?
Mark Long. Photo from the candidate's Web site.
Long is a fourth generation Washingtonian. He worked for Xerox, as a money manager and investment banker for Smith Barney, and currently as an education consultant. Naturally, he has some ideas for education reform. In addition to supporting the Fenty-Rhee efforts, he thinks we can serve special education children better, and cheaper, than we do today.
Long does support mixed-use, walkable development in downtown corridors, like Downtown Ward 7 or on upper Georgia Avenue, where his campaign made its headquarters (though only by accident). When I asked about resident concerns about growth in areas like Ward 7, Long said he understood specific neighborhood concerns, but felt that "we have to operate less out of fear and more out of faith."
Like Mara, Long agrees with the need to grow DC's population and tax base. He's for streetcars, probably, calling them "another shot in the arm for our developing businesses" and saying of existing streetcar proposals, "What I have seen I like." He feels strongly about environmental initiatives like commercial and residential recycling, drives a hybrid, and would like to see tax credits for green building.
More broadly, however, Long wasn't able to effectively articulate his ideas. He kept talking about "changing the culture," but how exactly wasn't so clear. Long spoke extensively about "smoother coordination" with the federal government, reducing "costs in the workflow process" in the DC government, and other business-terminology generalities.
On tougher transportation issues, Long fell back to hedging his answers. He wouldn't take a stand on Klingle, wasn't sure about the idea of narrowing RPP zones to neighborhoods instead of wards, and feels church parking "needs to be at the discretion of officers on a case by case basis".
I spoke to Long weeks ago, and in the interim, he has probably sharpened his rhetorical technique. It was enough to make Dupont ANC Commissioner Jack Jacobson, whom I greatly respect, endorse Long, and at least on specific on policy issues, Mark Long would probably be an improvement over Carol Schwartz. But his less sure understanding of detailed policy issues, coupled with his political inexperience, pose too great an obstacle to winning him a seat on the DC Council.
Parking
Breakfast links: Two sides of many coins
Photo by takomabiblelot on Flickr.
Petworth median parking compromise: The Petworth ANC, community and DDOT have reached a compromise about church parking on New Hampshire Avenue. DDOT wanted to replace a concrete median with a landscaped median, but a nearby church has been using it for parking on Sundays. Under the plan, the median will go in, but one of the travel lanes will become a parking lane on Sundays only.
Nobody's enforcing Capitol Hill meters: What good is having market-rate performance parking meters (which still aren't actually market rate, yet) when most of the cars parked at them haven't paid? (Infosnack)
Falls Church kinda-sorta-semi-urban-ish: A resident of Falls Church praises his "bucolic suburban village"'s transition "towards [a] quasi-urban place" by building some denser, mixed-use buildings on Route 7. Via Planetizen.
Ride-and-drive in Chicago: CTA is creating a unified fare card that's also an access card for I-GO car sharing services. This coincides with new shared cars that will be parked at CTA lots. (Apparently we have some Zipcars in WMATA lots too).
Public Spaces
DC Council is baaaack!
Today is the first Council legislative session after the recess. Right now Councilmembers just finished introducing bills. Here are a few of particular relevance:
Kalorama Park. Photo by lilpixiegirl03 on Flickr.
Brookland streetscape: Harry Thomas, Jr. introduced a resolution asking DDOT to postpone the 12th Street streetscape project in Brookland until something can be worked out about burying the power lines. Co-introducers: Graham, Brown, Cheh, Barry. Cosponsors: Schwartz, Alexander, Mendelson.
Church angle parking: Thomas also introduced a bill to allow churches to apply angle parking on Sundays, but only with the consent of their ANC and petitions with support from neighbors. In introducing the bill, Thomas expressed his hope that this could also provide a way to add more parking in business corridors as well. Cosponsors: Mendelson.
Tree removal in parks: Jim Graham introduced two bills concerning trees. One would tighten notice requirements for DDOT to remove trees in public parks. DDOT recently took down two old trees in Kalorama Park with no notice, prompting a big outcry from residents who doubted whether removing the trees was the only option and were upset by the suddenness of this irrevocable action. Co-introduced by Schwartz. Cosponsors: Mendelson, Thomas, Gray, Evans, Alexander.
Hazardous trees in public space: Graham also introduced a bill making the District responsible for hazardous trees in public space. In DC, much if not all of homeowners' front yards is technically in public space, not privately owned, but the homewoners landscape and tend to the land. According to Graham, there are situations where trees in public space present a hazard to others, but who can't afford to remove the trees. The bill would shift this responsibility to the government. Cosponsors: Schwartz, Cheh, Bowser, Mendelson, Alexander, Brown, Evans, Gray.
Impervious surface WASA fees: Right now, WASA charges sewer rates based on the total amount of water each property uses. However, properties covered with impervious, paved surfaces (like large parking lots) dump much more water into the sewer system in storms than properties mostly covered with dirt that can soak up the water. Graham also introduced a bill to allow WASA to charge an "impervious surface fee" based on the percentage of property that's covered with impervious surface. The bill will also cap rate increase for low-income ratepayers.
Graham's bill also lets DC WASA restrict the amount of storm sewer outflow it takes from Maryland. This gets at an existing political issue: Environmental law will force DC to spend about $2 billion to construct holding tanks so that sewage doesn't run into the river during a storm when the sewers fill up, but much of that runoff comes from Maryland. DC officials don't feel Maryland is doing enough to contribute to this problem, and by letting WASA limit what it takes from Maryland, according to Graham, it will force Maryland to negotiate in better faith to solve the problem. Cosponsors: Bowser, Cheh, Thomas, Schwartz, Alexander, Brown, Evans, Catania, Gray, Barry.
Protesters interrupted the bill introductions chanting slogans about public property. Currently, DC can sell underutilized public property, which some activists want to prevent. There was originally supposed to be a hearing this morning on a bill by Harry Thomas, Jr. to restrict such sales, but at some point the agenda changed to cover these bill introductions and a measure about prohibiting "aversive intervention techniques" in special education. Activists want a hearing on the public property bill.
@ggwash
- Successful speed cameras require fair speed limits
- Amid scandal, don't lose sight of Gray's policy achievements
- Montgomery plans 160-mile, "gold standard" BRT system
- Bethesda gets new but terrible bike racks
- DC's parks are 5th best in the nation, says "Park Score"
- VDOT ignores own data, pushes widening I-66
- DC's divide need not be black and white
Greater Washington
District of Columbia
